“It was no grand foreign policy meeting that I found myself in on the morning of February 22nd. There was no Frank Church, no John Warner, not even John Eisenhower. There was one man of great stature in the foreign policy field, and that was George Bush, seated to my left as I looked down the table in the darkened room of what was for me the interim NSC. Instead of people heading large departments, I found myself among what were probably some of the better U.S. experts on the subject of Afghanistan and the Middle East. Seated to my left was Nicholas A. Veliotes, the Assistant Secretary of State for Near Eastern and South Asian Affairs. Included in that lengthy title was the responsibility for Middle Eastern affairs. Farther down the table was the dubiously named Archer Blood, a Foreign Service Officer who had worked as America’s Ambassador to Afghanistan. Across from him was William Howard Taft IV, one of the Assistant Secretaries of Defense and distant cousin to Attorney General Robert Taft Jr. Lastly, seated at the very end of the table looking back at me across one row of empty seats and the rest of the de facto Security Council was Paul Wolfowitz.

Wolfowitz had spent the mid-seventies working for then-Secretary of State and later National Security Adviser Henry M. Jackson from 1972 until his death in 1974. Becoming a foreign policy advisor to New York Governor Daniel Patrick Moynihan the way Henry Kissinger had been for Nelson Rockefeller during the 1960’s, he served in that position and as a worker for the International Council on Foreign Relations from 1975 to late 1976, when he signed on to work for incoming Secretary of State Zbigniew Brzezinski. Considered one of the greatest liberal--in the modern definition--minds on the subject of foreign policy, it is still a mystery how he worked his way into a position where he was kicked out neither by Buckley nor by Church. Nevertheless, there he was as a State Department Official and proclaimed expert by his peers and colleagues.

Congressman Charles Wilson of Texas, the essential leader in Congress for action in Afghanistan, was late. However, we saw him rush in with whiskey on his breath. Had it not been for his efforts, the Kennedy Administration might have completely ignored the situation. “Well I got another twenty million appropriated toward the fund”, he said in his Texas twang. “Well that’s good” muttered Wolfowitz unemotionally. I realized I was not exactly among friends at this meeting. The vast majority, led by Wolfowitz of course, seemed to be Cold War Democrats, or at least associated with the policies of the Kennedy brothers. George was a neutral voice and Taft IV didn’t seem to have much of an opinion one way or the other. The lower level state department officials, however, seemed to think that the strategy in Afghanistan should be part of a larger strategy against the Soviets. Wilson--himself a moderate on foreign policy--and I basically held the line that this was a human rights mission and intended to help Democracy, not escalate the arms race. Wilson of course had the backing of a number of Cold Warriors, but wasn’t necessarily interested in pressuring me to do anything beyond what we were doing, which was funding the mujahideen to drive out the Soviet tanks and helicopters which were gunning down innocent civilians.

The subject of the meeting that day was largely about what a post-Soviet Afghanistan would look like. The Soviets by that point were recognized by a majority of the foreign policy field as a falling power. They were still incredibly dangerous, as was nuclear armaggedon, but by the measurements that I was given, bargaining with them would grow continually easier over the next couple of years, thus making my job easier as well. Therefore, it was decided, that the Soviet invasion of Afghanistan too was weak and would likely end before the end of 1984 given the Soviet recession and their continued economic and military failures. “The Soviets are on the run and here, now, we have the chance to crush them outright, and to expand that fight. Iran is in a prime position to whip Iraq in any dispute they get into, Communist presence in Southeast Asia is ready to completely topple, and China can be used against them the way we’ve done since 1974.” explained Wolfowitz. Wolfowitz himself had been an opponent of Bush’s visit to China in 1974, but his viewpoint was in terms of world power and he was then looking at the best path to making America an unquestionable military superstate. “The prime domestic concern”, I started out, “is the debt and deficit, even beyond the economy. This action in Afghanistan is an isolated human rights mission and it is going to be kept that way. We don’t have the money to press us once again into war, this time in Iraq or in Eastern Europe, or in Asia. We’ve been through two Hells with these strategies in the past sixteen years and we were just lucky enough to emerge alive from both. I have no interest in re-launching America into war in what I am planning will be a decade of peace.”

Wolfowitz obviously found my answer un-satisfactory. However, he knew what to expect by coming to this meeting and he laid back in his chair with an look somewhere between disappointment and contempt. He did, however, offer one last peace agreement between the two of us. “I think we can agree, though, that Democracy must be set up in post-Soviet Afghanistan.” “Agreed” We would eventually come to a disagreement on that as well as Wolfowitz wanted it spearheaded by America alone and with the aid of large corporations whose job it would be to provide basic services with funding from the U.S. government. I, however, and this was supported by George Bush, proposed that the cause be taken up by N.A.T.O. After all, we had been the primary opponent of international communism since it was first deemed a threat. France had pulled out of Vietnam early on, leaving us to fight that. The coalition going into Palestine had fallen apart. In Afghanistan we received no help whatsoever.

This and meetings like this would reflect the tenseness of the foreign policy debate in those days. While little there would be accomplished, it was a clear shift in viewpoint as now we were focused more and more on what would happen once the Soviets were driven out of Afghanistan than on the proper means of fighting them. This had been the debate to dominate 1981, and, according to Wilson, 1979 and 1980. We had finally gotten that right and we were in business. With that in mind, we were intent on answering the question of “What next?””

March 2nd, 1981The office of New York Governor Daniel Patrick Moynihan. State Department Official and former Moynihan Advisor Paul Wolfowitz is shown into the office and take his seat at a chair in front of the desk where Moynihan sits.Moynihan: Now what brings you up here from Washington. Complaints about your current job? I thought you’d worked hard to make sure you kept your position despite the changes.Wolfowitz: Well I was wrong to think I could somehow keep this administration sane. Hatfield hasn’t got any idea on how to handle the Soviets.Moynihan: Well I’ll give you credit on that. Why are you here? Do you want your old job back? Maybe some slot inside the U.N.?Wolfowitz: A job outside of Washington would be good. Since Church took over in January, all hope’s been lost. I hear Hatfield’s end game with Church’s worldwide tour is talks with the Soviets on a God damned nuclear freeze.Moynihan: Is that so? Mark’s a good man, but never the man to trust with any foreign policy assignment. Inside Jack’s Administration he was always known as the hippie Republican and he wasn’t treated that kindly by the Agnew or Bush Administrations either, let alone Bobby’s. He was always viewed as a radical who’d never be elected and in the end John Hinckley’s bullet put him in there. That and Reagan’s poor decision on choosing a Vice President.Wolfowitz: The main reason I came down here though was to talk of something more important than just my complaints as a representative of the State Department. What I’m asking for isn’t for a job, but for a candidate that can beat Hatfield.Moynihan: And you think I’m the one? I’ll tell you I have no business getting involved in Presidential politics. I intend on retiring for good this year and going back to looking over statistics for some government department. Maybe writing a book. We’ll see about that anyhow. But President? My kind is no longer electable in the age of having a candidate you’d like to sit down and have a beer with. I’d be easily electable around one hundred years ago, or more likely some machine boss. But in today’s world? I’m not geared to appeal to the common man.Wolfowitz:You’ve worked in the urban scene as our first H.U.D. Secretary and as a Labor Department official. You’ve been Ambassador to NATO during two Presidencies. You’ve served as Governor of New York the past seven years or so and as a popular and effective one. You’re a Hell of a lot better than the current crop of candidates popping up. Who will they nominate? Mondale? McGovern? Maybe a nice Southerner to return to their roots? This is a pathetic field the party’s looking at and honestly you’re one of the few credible men left in power after 1980.Moynihan: ...until Mario Cuomo comes riding in here on his golden horse. That Liberal Party is getting to be about as big a thorn in this state’s side as the Conservative Party.Wolfowitz: Getting back to subject, if not you, then who? What men are left that can actually stand up to Hatfield and not come off as some fringe communist or a fringe reactionary? You know every facet of this system and you’re unwilling to discuss the possibility of a candidacy.Moynihan: I’ve no idea and it’s none of my business until the New York primary comes up over two years away. One of the reasons I’m refusing is that I still haven’t decided whether I’ll even stand for re-election or not. Come 1983, you can come-a-knocking again. You can have your old position back, sure. Schedule a second appointment. However, it looks like my next meeting is with some lawyer named Rudolph Guiliani. Former candidate for mayor and someone you probably should have met from your days in Bobby’s Administration. I’ll see you soon though.

Hatfield. Ugh he's not even a fun libertarian. He's the bad kind. . Might there be a primary challenge, or a conservative uprising in the Democratic Party? A certain Dixie bulldog from North Carolina, perhaps? . Also, sorry for all the comments, but I was wondering what my favorite New York Senator is doing, and the one who lost, sadly, ITTL. (Buckley and D'Amato! ). Also, great update!

Hatfield. Ugh he's not even a fun libertarian. He's the bad kind. . Might there be a primary challenge, or a conservative uprising in the Democratic Party? A certain Dixie bulldog from North Carolina, perhaps? .

And as for the Democrats, Helms does have aspirations though I don't plan on letting him near the executive branch. Right now the poll frontrunners for the nomination include Mondale and McGovern from the party's left, Helms is the champion of Dixie and oen of Hatfield's worst enemies. Also, there may be two reverends making their political debuts in 1984. As for Northern labor populists, Senator Phillip W. Noel (i think that's the name) is a potential candidate. As you've seen, Moynihan is mentioned and is the best candidate to combine labor and foreign policy realists/hawks despite not really being suited for today's more direct democracy. Then of course there's Senator Jerry Brown out West, probably one of the last libertarian Democrats in the party who'll be running as the party's centrist candidate. Like with all real life elections, I plan on having 1984 be chock-full of candidates. As for challenging Hatfield, I plan on him being popular, plus the last four incumbent Presidents (Nixon, JFK, Bush, RFK) have been challenged for re-nomination and now the country would like to feel more united, especially after the sh**t storm of the 1970's.

Quote

Also, sorry for all the comments, but I was wondering what my favorite New York Senator is doing, and the one who lost, sadly, ITTL. (Buckley and D'Amato! ). Also, great update!

Not much of an update on that. Buckley may be proposing a human life amendment soon as he did in RL back in '74. Both Agnew and Bush were pro-choice, and now there's a pro-life Republican with a Senate majority in office. Still, it's not the best environment for that sort of thing with the pro-choice Baker leading the party. A coalition of social conservatives across the board could lead to some success, but right now the economy's the major focus and tensions are running high inside the higher chamber. Not sure what D'Amoto's doing as I'm not familiar with his career.

Major domestic legislation, especially on social issues, will be debuting in 1982 and 1983. YOu may like or dis-like it as you please.

Hatfield. Ugh he's not even a fun libertarian. He's the bad kind. . Might there be a primary challenge, or a conservative uprising in the Democratic Party? A certain Dixie bulldog from North Carolina, perhaps? .

And as for the Democrats, Helms does have aspirations though I don't plan on letting him near the executive branch. Right now the poll frontrunners for the nomination include Mondale and McGovern from the party's left, Helms is the champion of Dixie and oen of Hatfield's worst enemies. Also, there may be two reverends making their political debuts in 1984. As for Northern labor populists, Senator Phillip W. Noel (i think that's the name) is a potential candidate. As you've seen, Moynihan is mentioned and is the best candidate to combine labor and foreign policy realists/hawks despite not really being suited for today's more direct democracy. Then of course there's Senator Jerry Brown out West, probably one of the last libertarian Democrats in the party who'll be running as the party's centrist candidate. Like with all real life elections, I plan on having 1984 be chock-full of candidates. As for challenging Hatfield, I plan on him being popular, plus the last four incumbent Presidents (Nixon, JFK, Bush, RFK) have been challenged for re-nomination and now the country would like to feel more united, especially after the sh**t storm of the 1970's.

Quote

Also, sorry for all the comments, but I was wondering what my favorite New York Senator is doing, and the one who lost, sadly, ITTL. (Buckley and D'Amato! ). Also, great update!

Not much of an update on that. Buckley may be proposing a human life amendment soon as he did in RL back in '74. Both Agnew and Bush were pro-choice, and now there's a pro-life Republican with a Senate majority in office. Still, it's not the best environment for that sort of thing with the pro-choice Baker leading the party. A coalition of social conservatives across the board could lead to some success, but right now the economy's the major focus and tensions are running high inside the higher chamber. Not sure what D'Amoto's doing as I'm not familiar with his career.

Major domestic legislation, especially on social issues, will be debuting in 1982 and 1983. YOu may like or dis-like it as you please.

NO REVERANDS! Only Liberal Catholic Popes! Who run for Pope! Who don't like Alter Boys!

Now for D'Amato, according to Wikipedia, "His political career started with the Nassau County Republican Party, and he held the appointive position of Public Administrator of Nassau County, where he was responsible for managing the assets of county residents who died without wills. He was first appointed and then elected Receiver of Taxes of Hempstead, New York. He left this office to become a town supervisor in Hempstead and in 1977 he was elected presiding supervisor. He was also vice chairman of the Nassau County Board of Supervisors from 1977 to 1980.[2]Despite being a rather obscure candidate, he defeated incumbent Sen. Jacob Javits by 56% to 44% in the 1980 Republican primary election, after Javits' 1979 diagnosis of generally fatal amyotrophic lateral sclerosis. Javits nevertheless pursued the seat on the Liberal Party ticket, splitting the left-wing vote in ordinarily liberal New York with Democratic Congresswoman Elizabeth Holtzman and leading to D'Amato's 45% plurality victory."

I guess I'll just say he beat Javits in the 1980 NY primary, only to lose to Javits in the general who was running on the Liberal ticket. From there, he's considered one of the leaders of the state's weak GOP and it's hoped he could beat Moynihan in 1982 as both the Conservative and Republican nominee. But who knows?

I guess I'll just say he beat Javits in the 1980 NY primary, only to lose to Javits in the general who was running on the Liberal ticket. From there, he's considered one of the leaders of the state's weak GOP and it's hoped he could beat Moynihan in 1982 as both the Conservative and Republican nominee. But who knows?

You can find this in the 1980 congressional results, he was elected to Congress form CT in 1980. In RL he ran and lost.

Thanks, it's just that I haven't read any of this twice, and I haven't heard much about him since . Chris Dodd?

Well I'm not updating on everyone and not everyone is out just partying like Mark Hatfield and Jesse Helms get to do. Not sure on Chris Dodd. I'll have to check my Senate results, read a bit on his career, etc.

"It was in 1982 that Hatfield really came into his own as a leader, and I think those first steps--ranging from careful to outright near political suicide--are what led him to become the leader we still revere today, even to the point of making him out to be far more than even he was."

April 5th, 1982Inside the Oval Office, Secretary of Defense John Warner meets with his President and employed, President Mark Hatfield. Sitting in the chair to the right of Warner is Vice President Barry Goldwater.Hatfield: Sit down John. If things go the way I'd like, this will prove an important meeting, not only for the administration, but for our nation's military.Warner: [taking his seat] Sure. What's going on?Hatfield: As you may very well be aware, during my career in the Senate, I pushed hard for civil liberties of all sorts and for things ranging from gay rights to the end of the death penalty.Warner: Uh-huh...Hatfield: Now, you two have both served in the military with distinction. You, John, have served as Secretary of the Navy for nearly six years and you both have served as Secretary of Defense. With the experience you two have, I'd like to know: would it be possible to allow homosexuals to serve openly in the military?[Warner stares in stunned silence as Vice President Goldwater quickly recovers from the shock]Goldwater: Well, it's always been my opinion that you don't have to be straight to be in the military, you just have to shoot straight. Now I can't say I've had very many experiences with gays, or even any at all, but in all my years, as a soldier, as a Senator, as a Secretary Defense, I have to say: why the Hell shouldn't they be able to serve?Warner: [recovering] Uh... Well, I can't say I'd really have a problem with it, though I can't say I've ever really thought about it either. I'd have to think about this and talk with other members of my staff and my department. As well, Eisenhower should probably be brought in on this. This would be a big move. And before anything happens, you should definitely scout out allies in Congress. This is a bold decision and should my department finally decide to go through with this, I'd be proud to be part of it.Hatfield: I'm glad to hear that. In my opinion, every person has a right to serve their country and their lifestyle choices shouldn't detract from that. This may become one of the most important civil rights issues since 1969.

"The proposal of having gays serve openly in the military took me completely by surprise. Hell, I didn't know it was even an issue until that meeting. However, I went back to my department, and I decided to take the President's side on the issue. Was there opposition. Of course. However, most of it came from a number of entrenched bureaucrats within the department and a couple generals that had been in the brass since Nixon's time. From what I heard from troops and lower level leaders, and from civilian members of my staff, we could agree that this could go through. I myself was cautious and not really mentally prepared for the idea. However, reporting back to the President three weeks later, the go-ahead was given. It became somewhat surreal, seeing him at the press conference two days later, and when Paul Tsongas proposed the final bill in the House in June, I'd finally gotten used to the idea. Passing that thing was a wild ride though."

-Interview with former Senator John Warner (R-VA) for the Hatfield Project

"It is with great pleasure that I announce I am running for a third term for Governor of the State of New York. While the last seven years have accomplished much in the way of reform, efficiency, and helping the average New Yorker, there is still far too much to be done. As well, I hope this ends discussion over the idea that I run for President in 1984. I have no intentions of doing so and am quite happy here in New York."

"My role in the passage of what became popularly known as the Civil Rights Act of 1982 became my greatest achievement of my somewhat lackluster career in the House, up to that point. It boosted my visibility in the House and gave me a relationship with the President, a relationship, I think, that was what mainly drew me into switching to the Republicans four years later. With my national profile raised, many were discussing me as a potential candidate for Senate two years from then. With popular Senator Elliot Richardson, a liberal Republican, announcing he would be stepping down, I was discussed as a front-runner for 1984."

-1991 Interview with Senator Paul Tsongas (R-MA)

"**Sigh** I still consider my efforts to stop the so-called Civil Rights Act of '82 one of my biggest failures in the Senate. That doesn't mean, however, that we won't keep pushin' and working' 'til the job is done. Hatfield's plans, through and through, will be repealed in the Helms Presidency."

Thanks for updating! So many people neglect to note that dean was a Republican in the 60's, and the slightest butterfly could send him back into the GOP's corner. He'd be a Hatfield Republican, but a libertarian leader in the party IMO

"The passage of the CRA set the tone for the upcoming 1982 elections. While in 1980, the Democrats had been set light years backwards in comparison to the majority they had when Robert F. Kennedy entered office, my party's own power was precarious. Eleven gains in the Senate had been made in 1980, putting the Republican party at a fifty-two seat majority. The resignation of Barry Goldwater left us with fifty-one seats to our name by the time 1982 came around. Of course, referring to party dominance in terms of mere numbers is useless in this game, especially with the presence of two Conservative Senators (Jim Buckley of New York and Harry Byrd Jr. of Virginia) and one Liberal Senator (Jake Javits, also of New York). With the complexities of the party makeup on both sides of the aisle, coalitions formed on the basis of each piece of legislation to come forward. In short, however, we were left with fifty-one seats that November. The Democrats had forty-six, the Conservatives had two, and the Liberals had one. With the partisan and ideological media machines warmed up and humming following the debate over the CRA, they were ready to launch into the mid-term election frenzy."

"After my year in the Senate, I suddenly found myself facing re-election. My short time in the body had been a rough and rowdy one, and I had made local and national head-lines more than once. However, in all my time digging up arguments with my colleagues, I had done little to ingratiate myself with my newly adopted home state. So between September and November, I wound my way back towards Arizona and my constituency. Going on a whirl-wing campaign tour, I used my status as incumbent to my advantage, meeting with nearly every major local figure in Arizona in a matter of weeks, and a few Republicans too. By November, I was surprised to only have roughly a two-point lead over my opponent, Phoenix Mayor Margaret Hance. Despite my using every advantage I had, Margaret Hance was a charismatic campaigner and her record as Mayor of Arizona's largest city and had the backing of a large amount of Arizona's wealthy Republicans. When election night came, I survived by the skin of my teeth and with less than fifty percent of the vote once again. That, thankfully, would be the last time that ever happened to me."

"The Open Primary was scheduled for August 25th. Campaigning against a slew of candidates, I had the obvious advantage among the field. I was not only known statewide, but nationally. I had served the state for twelve years in the Senate and before that had served in the State House. With my status as one of the leading Democrats in the state, polls showed my consistently leading the majority of my opponents, and all of the Democrats. Of course campaigning in Alaska, especially with fall coming, was never the enjoyable experience it would probably be in Florida around that time of the year, but then again, I didn't move up to Alaska so I could be in Florida. Driving through along the snow covered highways and plodding towards campaign events, I was working the hardest I had since 1968 when I was first elected to the Senate. Nevertheless, it looked like things were paying off as, despite the efforts of my opponents, I maintained my lead in the polls all the way to election day. On September 25th, I came in first out of the fifteen or twenty on the ballot and was officially the Democratic nominee for Governor of Alaska, with my largest opponent being salesman and business person Bill Sheffield. I found myself facing the second place finisher that night, Republican Speaker of the Alaska State House Tom Fink, as well as the Libertarian and other third party candidates."

"Well, on a return trip to Texas in the winter of 1981, I heard a big rumor going around, the type you don't just ignore, that Governor Lloyd Bentsen was retiring. With that, Republicans were thinking of running an actually credible candidate that year for Governor. Some people asked me, and well, I thought about it and I said the usual "maybe". When in February, I think, it became official, then people in the party were really looking for a candidate, even thinking of asking former President Bush or his son to run for the slot. However, neither of 'em did, and eventually, after talking with Carol and the rest of my family, I decided that I had done some great work in the House, but now it was time to really go back to my adopted home state and help them out. So in May, I officially announced. Eh, I was nominated easily enough, and my opponent was, if I recall, former Congressman Kent Hance, who I easily beat in the general and there I was, Governor of the Lone Star State."

Notable Senate RacesArizona: Senator John S. McCain III is re-elected by a very close margin against Republican opponent, Phoenix Mayor Margaret Hance.California: Senator Barry Goldwater Jr. is elected to his second term in the Senate.Connecticut: Brother of former President George Bush, Prescott Bush Jr., is elected to the Senate as a Republican.Maine: With Senator Edmund Muskie retiring, Republican Congressman David F. Emery is elected.Michigan: With the retirement of Senator Lenore Romney (R) who took over after her husband left office in 1976, the race goes to Democrat Sanders M. Levin. The state is now represented solely in the Senate by the Levin brothers.\Minnesota: Democrat Mark Dayton, a protege of Senator Walter Mondale, is himself elected to the Senate.Nevada: Senator Paul Laxalt loses re-election in a close race against former Senator Harry Reid who was defeated two years ago. New York: Senator James L. Buckley is elected, in a surprise, to a third and final term, winning with just 48% of the vote in a multiple-candidate race.Texas: Senator James Baker just barely survives re-election against former Governor Dolph Briscoe.Virginia: With Senator Harry F. Byrd, Jr., retiring, Secretary of Defense and 1978 Senate candidate John Warner is able to win by a comfortable margin against the Democratic Lieutenant Governor.

Other Notable RacesAlaska: Having made it to the final round, former Senator Mike Gravel is nonetheless defeated in his race for Governor of Alaska.California: Incumbent Governor Pete Wilson is elected to his first full term. He first came to office with the resignation of then-Governor Reagan in 1980.Connecticut: Congressman Joseph Lieberman is re-elected to his second term in the House of Representatives.New York: Democrat Governor Daniel Patrick Moynihan is re-elected with 60% of the vote against Republican opponent and 1980 Senate candidate Al D'Amoto. Meanwhile, former Mayoral candidate Rudolph W. Giuliani (D) is elected to the United States House of Representatives.Texas: Congressman Ronald E. Paul (R) is elected Governor of Texas following incumbent Governor Lloyd Bentsen's (D) retirement. In Congressional races, Republicans George W. Bush and H. Ross Perot are re-elected by good margins.

Quote from: Greenwhich Times

Thursday, June 24th, 2010Prescott Bush Jr., brother and uncle to Presidents, dies at 87A rock of one of America's political dynasties, who made a name for himself while shouldering the expectations of his father's legacy, not to mention his legendary name, has died.

A respected businessman, philanthropist, and politician of Connecticut, "Pressy" as he was known, left a long life of accomplishments behind him.

Serving not only as a United States Senator from Connecticut from 1982 to 1988, he also served as Ambassador to China for both Reagan and Hatfield (1981-1982), as a member of the Republican National Committee, a moderator of Greenwhich town meeting in the fifties and sixties, as an airline executive, and one of the leaders of trade with China from the mid-seventies through the nineties.

Bush's death has hit a nerve with top Republicans in this swing state that has produced a long line of kingmakers, diplomats, and presidential confidantes. "I think he was a scion. He lived a passionate and wonderful life, very reflective of the whole Bush tribe," said Joseph Verner Reed, a fellow member of Greenwich's old guard who was chief of protocol in former President George H.W. Bush's Cabinet and U.S. ambassador to Morocco under Presidents Reagan and Hatfield.

The funeral is scheduled to take place at noon on Wednesday at the Greenwhich Episcopal Church.